Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T19:42:21.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rum Ship Seizures Under the Recent Treaties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

Edwin D. Dickinson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Editorial Comment
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , January 1926 , pp. 111 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1926

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 136 Harvard Law Review, 609, 612.

2 Grogan v. Walker and Sons (1922), 259 U. S. 80; Cunard Steamship Co. v. Mellon (1923), 262 U. S. 100. See comment in this Journal , Vol. 17, p. 504, and in 21 Michigan Law Review, 911.

3 See 9 Geo. II. c. 35, 22, 23; Act of 1790, 9, 10, 11, 12, in 1 Stat. L. 145, 155, 156, 157; Act of 1799, 23, 24, 25, 26, in 1 Stat. L. 627, 644, 646, 647; Act of 1866, 25, in 14 Stat. L. 178, 184; U. S. Rev. St., 2806, 2809, 2811, 2814; Act of 1790, 13, 14, in 1 Stat. L. 145,157,158; Act of 1799, 27, 28, in 1 Stat. L. 627, 648; The Schooner Betsy (1818), 1 Mason, 353; U. S. Rev. St., 2867, 2868; Act of 1922, 586, 587, in 42 Stat. L. 858, 980, 981; Act of 1790, 31, in 1 Stat. L. 145, 164; Act of 1799, 54, in 1 Stat. L. 627, 668; U. S. Rev. St., 3067; Act of 1922, 581, in 42 Stat. L. 858, 979.

4 35 Stat. L. 1152.

5 See Latham v. United States (1924), 2 F. (2d), 208, 210; United States v. Ford (1925), 3 F. (2d), 643, 647.

6 Convention between the United States and Great Britain, May 22, 1924, in the Supplement to this Journal , Vol. 18, pp. 127, 128. See comment in this Journal , Vol. 18, p. 301.

7 Ibid.

8 Ibid.

9 The Pictonian (1924), 3 F. (2d), 145.

10 The Over The Top (1925), 5 F. (2d), 838, 845.

11 The Panama (1925), 6 F. (2d), 326, 327.

12 United States v. Henning (1925, 7 F. (2d), 488, 490.

13 United States v. Bengochea (1922), 279 Fed. 537.

14 Muriel E. Winters (1925), 6 F. (2d), 466.

15 >The Grace and Ruby (1922), 283 Fed. 475, 478. See this Journal , Vol. 19, p. 157.

16 36 Harvard Law Review, 609, 611. See The Grace and Ruby, supra.

17 Church v. Hubbart (1804), 2 Cranch, 187, 234. See the British Territorial Waters Jurisdiction Act of 1878, preamble, 41 and 42 Viet. c. 73.

18 The Grace and Ruby, supra. See 23 Columbia Law Review, 472; 23 Michigan Law Review, 163; 32 Yale Law Journal, 259. See also the comment of Secretary Hughes, in this Journal, Vol. 18, p. 232.

19 United States v. 1, 250 Cases of Liquor: The MarshallHenry L. (1922), 286 Fed. 260, 292 Fed. 486. See also the comment of Secretary Hughes, in this Journal., Vol. 18, p. 233.

20 United States v. Ford (1925), 3 F. (2d), 643.

21 United States v. Bengochea (1922), 279 Fed. 537.

22 The BachmanMarjorie E. (1925),4 F. (2d), 405, 407.

23 Ibid.

24 The Over The Top (1925), 5 F. (2d), 838, 844.

25 The Frances Louise (1924), 1 F. (2d), 1004.

26 The Panama (1925), 6 F. (2d), 326.